Re: TLS-SRP (was Re: J-PAKE in NSS)

2011-03-10 Thread Daniel Stenberg

On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, Anders Rundgren wrote:


It is too late introducing TLS-SRP, the market will not use it.


Uh? There's not just one single market that will or won't use a particular 
protocol feature. There are plenty of different areas where TLS is used and 
some of them will use TLS-SRP, and some even already are.


--

 / daniel.haxx.se
--
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto


Re: TLS-SRP (was Re: J-PAKE in NSS)

2011-03-10 Thread Anders Rundgren
On 2011-03-10 09:32, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
 On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, Anders Rundgren wrote:
 
 It is too late introducing TLS-SRP, the market will not use it.
 
 Uh? There's not just one single market that will or won't use a particular 
 protocol feature. There are plenty of different areas where TLS is used and 
 some of them will use TLS-SRP, and some even already are.

TLS-SRP doesn't do anything that certificates do not do better.
If SRP had been available in the browser it could have been important.
But it failed, hard.

Anders

-- 
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto


Re: TLS-SRP (was Re: J-PAKE in NSS)

2011-03-10 Thread Brian Smith
Jean-Marc Desperrier wrote:
 I don't see it as a substitute for PKI, only as a substitute for
 user/password.

If you want SRP but don't need TLS-SRP then you could implement SRP outside of 
NSS and then build the UI support around that non-NSS support as a HTTP


  1. The user's username is sent in the clear. The user's username
  should be protected.
 
 You mean for privacy reasons, not as a way to limit brute force
 attacks ?

Both. In particular, if somebody learned that my Gizmodo username/password was 
bsm...@mozilla.com/bieber4ever, then when they see bsm...@mozilla.com in the 
clear they can just try to break into the connection using that password. But, 
also, I do not want to tell everybody in every Starbucks I go to my email 
address.

 Although I don't see SRP as a replacement for PKI, I'm tempted to say
 that the equivalent of the username in PKI is the certificate, and
 that the certificate is not protected at all. In a SSL session with
 client authentification, the client certificate is sent in the clear
 (except in the case of IIS, that open a non-authenticated SSL session
 and renegotiates it at the time it needs user authentication).

Yes, this is a problem that needs to be fixed in TLS and worked around (as much 
as possible) in implementations. I just filed 
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640745 about this. The same could 
be done for TLS-SRP, but you would need to authenticate the server first using 
PKI.

  3. The user cannot verify the identity of the server until after the
  password has been entered. However, we've trained users to enter
  their passwords only after verifying the server's identity.
 
 The rule doesn't change so much : you still need to enter your
 password inside a secure element, ie if we teach user it's OK to
 enter their SRP password in a non secure GUI because it won't be
 sent to the server we loose.

It's hard to explain what a secure element is to somebody. It's much easier 
to say make sure the address bar turns green and says 'PayPal, Inc.' but even 
that's asking too much most of the time.

- Brian
-- 
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto